early lookism/psl was some sort of collective psychosis

[Archimedes]

if you noticed those trends on .org, you'll see they tried to split those three - aesthetic, attractiveness, 'sexual appeal' - this for me is the ultimate flaw, and started being pushed as counter to the 'prettyboy theorists' 

this is because deep down they couldn't and still can't let go of neo-Darwinian and Evo-Psych apologetics otherwise the blackpill won't make sense

[Archimedes]

^ I think there are ways to platonic ideals of the Human aesthetics which by aestheticism itself justifies attraction, that is, it doesn't need biological justification at all. since there have been endlessly apologetics collected for why the 'attract' happens, and those theories either do not last or are not applicable outside the specific framework it's trying to justify, the only pattern left being 'beauty' which is ultimately proven by femboys/prettyboys

I agree with the 'blackpill' in my personal version of it, which is of roles. and so there's some kind of 'proto-determinism' to it. in physiognomy, the 'Evil' looks 'Evil' and if Evil people do look Evil, how would biological theories ever justify something as weird as that?

inb4 'predatory looks' - no, there's difference between predatory or/ threatening and Evil. lions look majestic and so do tigers (i.e, beautiful.) sharks look ok except for its eyes, which are dead, and is common look amongst fishes - there isn't Evil looks:Evil behavior anywhere in nature, esp. that venomous creatures are rather 'colorful' and 'alluring' by purposeful design (i.e, beautiful) ﹣so yes, it's exclusive to Humans